Yosemite looks terrible!

[TechGod]

I don't think you read too carefully about Metal or you'd know it's only for iOS and there are no known plans to bring it to OS X as they are completely different chipsets.



No, some things in Linux are "cutting edge" (as in the latest crap to try out here first). That's not the same thing as "state of the art". Art implies a near whimsical simplicity and ease of use that Linux has NEVER had. Linux is a PITA to use and having tried about 12 different versions in the past 12 years (not one a year, but sometimes 2-3 in one year), I think I can say that without feeling completely ignorant of the situation. Linux is about 15 years behind OS X in usability and that's saying a lot since OS X hasn't been around that long.

Yeah, if you don't ever install any software except from default repositories, it's a breeze to use something like Ubuntu on most setups. The problems start when you go to customize and add new software that you want to use that isn't on the repository or is the FAR more typical 3-4 versions behind on the repository because people working for free don't move too fast.... Then you get to see why repositories exist in the first place. You can pray that your distribution is supported by whatever vendor/person that is making it. OR you can use a generic build that may or may not work with your distribution depending on where your various resources and libraries, etc. are located exactly and if not, you can always jsut COMPILE COMPILE COMPILE it yourself like most software ten years ago in Linux. Yeah! That's a good way to spend a few hours to get Mame to work right on your machine! Woohoo. I know I've done it many times in the past. YOu get this feeling of accomplishment that you can actually run a tiny little utility that would have just been a "drag and forget" in OS X. And it's all due to the total and utter lack of compatibility between various Linux "flavors" and that's due to Linux being a mishmash of a thousand somewhat incompatible variations of "hacker happy happy joy joy". And having watched the Linux crowd for the past 14 years on and off, all I can say is they often ENJOYED being "elitist" and obtuse and hard to use and HATED developments like KDE and Ubuntu that tried to make it more mainstream. If you can't make Slackware work (and better yet in 2004 instead of 2014), you're not a real Linux user.



Yeah, I don't know if it's better than Windows Explorer. It's more of a step sideways in some respects, IMO. You might prefer one method over another, but frankly I preferred Dismaster II on my Amiga 3000 nearly twenty years ago to either one's default setup.



I knew it wouldn't be long before the first fan showed up to to tell us why it's a good move to get rid of identifying information and useful features. Obviously, NO ONE uses Firewire drives (I must imagine owning two myself, one FW400 and one FW800 since it's been a whole TWO YEARS since USB 3.0 came out and THREE since Thunderbolt that obviously FW800 drives are suddenly USELESS.

Frankly, I don't care if only one person still uses one. Why "break" something that isn't broken??? [I]The point is the OS is now LESS functional than before. [/I]

Red part I agree with. Its very stupid they would not have a differentiator between FireWire and USB so bad Apple in this respect.

The bolded bit? It's a beta, many things changed between the first DP and the latest one. They are still working on it, give it time. If Apple doesn't fix it however I will certainly not be supporting this stupid design made by them. FireWire is different from USB and this should show via the icons.

 

[joedec]

The sad part with some of the statements I read on this forum is how popularity and cost drive technical decisions. Firewire was adopted by Apple because it was the technically correct choice. Firewire was developed as a mass storage protocol as opposed to USB (or Universal Serial Bus) which, as a serial bus, was designed for slow devices like mice, keyboards and such. Least we forget Firewire brought us the ability to daisy chain and target mode disk, good stuff in addition to high transfer rates.

As far as Linux is concerned its a systems engineering nightmare, it doesn't scale well, the I/O subsystem has only caught up with traditional UNIX machines is the last couple years, and that's only because they've been cash cowed. Its horribly fragmented, supported by unpaid volunteers. Think about the recent OpenSSL fiasco, four unpaid volunteers maintained it, or were suppose to. Apple chose Mach and the FreeBSD stack because its much more robust, modern and manageable.

One other thing, not only is Metal targeted at iOS8, I believe its specifically A7.

 

[grahamperrin]

New hard drive icons...

The first icon is not too dissimilar to what's familiar from Yosemite. This icon may be perceived as stale and outdated. (Circular; a disc that is nonexistent in many new Macs; and so on.)

14A329r may represent the overall refresh to the Mac platform. The second icon is flatter and has less visual clutter. Customers may view this as an enhancement.

Distractions are kept to a minimum.

… new hard drive icons …

Whoever provided this image for Apple releases OS X Yosemite Developer Preview 6 at iDownloadBlog may have perceived a spaciousness to the fresh iconography (the volume is named Free Space):

There may be enhancement requests to add transparency to the disk icons.

… a USB and a FireWire …

There may be enhancement requests for connectivity to be indicated in the Info window of Finder.

Years ago I pleaded for modernisation of Disk Utility. It's quite unsuitable for modern approaches to storage.

Perhaps when OS X becomes legacy for Mac hardware – and when the future of Apple Core Store becomes not completely opaque – customers will no longer perceive a need for storage containers to be presented at the Computer level in Finder and the like; will no longer perceive a need for (mis)representation of a disk as being a peer to items that are within the Desktop folder (the view of a disk within a volume within a disk is terribly outdated – somewhat of a relic from last century's computing metaphors). And so on.

Some of what's above is not representative of my own thoughts. Some is. Some people may identify strongly with all of the above.

 

[TechGod]

The sad part with some of the statements I read on this forum is how popularity and cost drive technical decisions. Firewire was adopted by Apple because it was the technically correct choice. Firewire was developed as a mass storage protocol as opposed to USB (or Universal Serial Bus) which, as a serial bus, was designed for slow devices like mice, keyboards and such. Least we forget Firewire brought us the ability to daisy chain and target mode disk, good stuff in addition to high transfer rates.

As far as Linux is concerned its a systems engineering nightmare, it doesn't scale well, the I/O subsystem has only caught up with traditional UNIX machines is the last couple years, and that's only because they've been cash cowed. Its horribly fragmented, supported by unpaid volunteers. Think about the recent OpenSSL fiasco, four unpaid volunteers maintained it, or were suppose to. Apple chose Mach and the FreeBSD stack because its much more robust, modern and manageable.

One other thing, not only is Metal targeted at iOS8, I believe its specifically A7.

Did you quote me?

 

[joedec]

Did you quote me?

Started to, thinking I'd maintain the chain of thought, then realized my comments were not really relevant to yours. So I edited it out. Not to offend.

----------

The first icon is not too dissimilar to what's familiar from Yosemite. This icon may be perceived as stale and outdated. (Circular; a disc that is simply nonexistent in any new Mac; and so on.)

14A329r may represent the overall refresh to the Mac platform. The second icon is flatter and has less visual clutter. Customers may view this as an enhancement.

Distractions are kept to a minimum.

One is the exact replica of a drive that most users have never seen in their lives and never will, the other is an orange brick with a green light.

How exactly does this reduce "Distraction"?

 

[TechGod]

Started to, thinking I'd maintain the chain of thought, then realized my comments were not really relevant to yours. So I edited it out. Not to offend.

----------



One is the exact replica of a drive that most users have never seen in their lives and never will, the other is an orange brick with a green light.

How exactly does this reduce "Distraction"?

Ah I see, i just got a notification badge and was confused.

 

[RachelLayette]

I think it mostly looks excellent, I love the boot screen and "dark mode", but I agree about folder color, and probably would remove the red, yellow, green colors on the buttons all together if it was up to me... I'd be curious to see dark mode apply to windows title bars as well, I think it would look pretty slick. Sorry you dislike it, is a shame we can't have choice between glass dock etc, something for everyone seems like such an easy feature to add.

I too love Yosemite generally. There are a few glaring ugly spots but I am pretty sure Apple will refine everything before the official roll out. Part of being a beta user is to see the little refinements along the way, before everyone else get the big official update!

 

[leman]

I don't think you read too carefully about Metal or you'd know it's only for iOS and there are no known plans to bring it to OS X as they are completely different chipsets.

I assure you that I know more about 3D graphics than you (this is not a boast, its simply a fact). I am also perfectly aware that Metal is currently iOS only. Apple usually tests out new APIs on iOS, and it makes a lot of sense to evaluate Metal like this. I am absolutely positive that Metal (in this or other form) will come to OS X. There is nothing about Metal which makes it chipset-specific. Its a general-purpose abstract 3D API, just like OpenGL or DirectX, only that its optimised for least driver overhear. There is no reason why Metal couldn't run on Nvidia, Itel or AMD hardware, once they provide appropriate drivers. Furthermore, by design, Metal drivers will be much easier to write than OpenGL drivers and they will have less bugs from the start.

 

[grahamperrin]

… How exactly does this reduce "Distraction"?

An answer might come from people who find Mavericks to have a somewhat distracting appearance. I'm not one of those people.

I ceased to view disks/volumes on the Desktop many years ago. I very quickly became accustomed to the logical approach, which Apple offered as a preference.

… functionality is loosing badly. This is Beta 2, new disk icons … I do care about removing the type. These are a USB and a FireWire Drive, which ones which?

A minor change to your habits should allow you to realise that in your case, there's neither badness nor loss of functionality from the system.

For any disk, you should find it as easy – if not easier – to use Disk Utility than to use Finder.

(Off-topic: the many customer complaints about Finder include perceived slowness. That's almost invariably a symptom of other things, not a problem with Finder itself.)

In the following example, the four volumes of a single external drive are amber, and I renamed three of four to share the same name. (In reality I always prefer to avoid more than one volume having the same name. What's below is to help people understand the arguments.)

Simply select a connected item. This one clearly uses USB:

– note, in the footer, absence of a USB icon but presence of the word USB.

With Disk Utility there's not only a written description of the 'bus', you also benefit from a plain english description of the drive on which the volume is stored

There's get nothing like that written context within the constraints of the Computer window of Finder.


Select a slice:

– the large Unmount button is easily found in the toolbar.



And so on.

 

[joedec]

An answer might come from people who find Mavericks to have a somewhat distracting appearance. I'm not one of those people.

I ceased to view disks/volumes on the Desktop many years ago. I very quickly became accustomed to the logical approach, which Apple offered as a preference.



A minor change to your habits should allow you to realise that in your case, there's neither badness nor loss of functionality from the system.

For any disk, you should find it as easy – if not easier – to use Disk Utility than to use Finder.

(Off-topic: the many customer complaints about Finder include perceived slowness. That's almost invariably a symptom of other things, not a problem with Finder itself.)

In the following example, the four volumes of a single external drive are amber, and I renamed three of four to share the same name. (In reality I always prefer to avoid more than one volume having the same name. What's below is to help people understand the arguments.)

Image




Simply select a connected item. This one clearly uses USB:
Image
– note, in the footer, absence of a USB icon but presence of the word USB.

With Disk Utility there's not only a written description of the 'bus', you also benefit from a plain english description of the drive on which the volume is stored

There's get nothing like that written context within the constraints of the Computer window of Finder.


Select a slice:
Image
– the large Unmount button is easily found in the toolbar.



And so on.

You work too hard. I select the disk on the Desktop, use Cmd-E and I'm done. Disk Utility is for more complex operations like partitioning and such.

Maybe most users have no idea what the symbols mean and so its just another dumbing down decision. Its to bad, it was a cool trick and a nice cue.

PS Or drag the disk to the trash, that'll eject it also. They even give you a visual.

 

[hamis92]

You work too hard. I select the disk on the Desktop, use Cmd-E and I'm done. Disk Utility is for more complex operations like partitioning and such.

Maybe most users have no idea what the symbols mean and so its just another dumbing down decision. Its to bad, it was a cool trick and a nice cue.

This.

The symbols are a nice timesaver (for me at least). Oftentimes I have different types of drives (USB, FireWire) connected to my Mac and how my mind works is that I identify the disk by the symbol ("I want this and that file from the FireWire drive"). If the disk only has one volume or there are no other FireWire drives connected, I don't even have to bother reading the volume names – symbols are so much faster to identify than text.

They also provide nice continuity between the physical world and the virtual world. Most users maybe don't realise that but I bet it has at least a subconscious effect ("This icon has the same symbol that's on the connector where I plugged my hard drive so it must mean this is that hard drive").

 

[grahamperrin]

You work too hard. I select the disk on the Desktop, use Cmd-E …

My preferred method also uses Finder, and may be somewhat simpler than yours:

1. Command-Shift-C
2. arrow key(s) to select the required volume
3. Command-Option-E

– and so, for example, there's no need to additionally respond to a three-button system dialogue about multiple volumes on that disk.

To joedec, and others: my responses to some of your past posts were glib. I was frustrated. Now, Apple's Public Beta 2 presents an opportunity for me to suspend that glibness; to enjoy less antagonistic discussions with some of the people who (naturally) do not share my opinions.

For a few minutes: forget disks, Finder, Disk Utility and appearances. Think of Yosemite in General.

If Apple's next change to the operating system forces your use of Yosemite to be frequently more difficult – a degree of difficulty greater than you would find with (say) the Disk Utility example above – then what will be your likely reactions?

 

[n-evo]

(Circular; a disc that is simply nonexistent in any new Mac; and so on.)

My 2013 iMac, still being sold today as the latest model, came with a Fusion Drive and thus contains a spinning regular HDD next to SSD. Stock models come with an HDD only.

 

[grahamperrin]

… iMac … Stock models come with an HDD only.

True!

I have spent so long – more than a year – looking almost exclusively at Apple notebook options for myself (and for colleagues), I had not thought to check whether what's true for notebooks is true for all other Mac hardware. That's an explanation, but no excuse for a careless statement. Sorry!

Postscript – again, careless – one of the cheapest 13" MacBook Pro models has a 5,400 RPM drive. My interest in hard disk drive-based Macs ceased after I upgraded my MacBookPro5,2 with an SSHD; and I would never recommend a 5,400 to a colleague.

 

[tkermit]

The symbols are a nice timesaver (for me at least).

I'm fairly certain the symbols will return... certainly once Apple has gotten enough feedback about it. Remember, this is not the final product.

 

[hamis92]

I'm fairly certain the symbols will return... certainly once Apple has gotten enough feedback about it. Remember, this is not the final product.

You are absolutely correct on that and I hope they will Feedback time ->

 

[grahamperrin]

Force of habit

I'm fairly certain the symbols will return …

… I hope they will …

I'm curious.

Could either of you change your habits, to look elsewhere for an iconic representation of the method of connection? (USB, FireWire, Thunderbolt etc..)

 

[joedec]

For a few minutes: forget disks, Finder, Disk Utility and appearances. Think of Yosemite in General.

If Apple's next change to the operating system forces your use of Yosemite to be frequently more difficult – a degree of difficulty greater than you would find with (say) the Disk Utility example above – then what will be your likely reactions?

As long as its a UNIX machine I can make it work, its easy enough to change the icon, some of my drives I do that now. That's not the point, the point is Apple is generally dumbing down everything now.

For example, I used iWork and Aperture for a few years and my usage is not trivial.

In Aperture my photo database was huge and highly organized by ratings, keywords, projects, etc. Apple chose to drop that product and put us on Photos which is not in line with how I prefer to manage my data, in fact the user has no ability to manage their photo library, its all "automatic". So at great expense I migrated to Adobe Lightroom.

iWork's latest update, if you used Applescript you were dead in the water, or you can maintain two versions without compatibility. That was a really amateur mistake. My answer was move back to Microsoft Office, which BTW follows the Apple HIG to the letter.

So the frustration here for me is now they are going after the OS, making amateur mistakes again.

Don't you think its a little ridiculous that at Beta 2 and on a major release we're talking about fonts and icons? That's the easy stuff. When you look at the amount of technology Apple has embraced successfully in the last decade its embarrassing to not have those issues completely dialed in.

Apple gave the CEO job to the supply chain guy, and the software job to a hardware guy, of course they spend all their time on "look and feel", that's the level of depth they can comprehend, but like I said previously, what's the alternative?

 

[tkermit]

I'm curious.

Could either of you change your habits, to look elsewhere for an iconic representation of the method of connection? (USB, FireWire, Thunderbolt etc..)

Sure.

iWorks latest update, if you used Applescript you were dead in the water, or you can maintain two versions without compatibility. That was a really amateur mistake. My answer was move back to Microsoft Office, which BTW follows the Apple HIG to the letter.

fwiw, Apple never forced anyone to switch from the older to the newer version. Plus, by now, full AppleScript support has returned to the iWork suite.

Apple gave the CEO job to the supply chain guy, and the software job to a hardware guy, of course they spend all their time on "look and feel", that's the level of depth they can comprehend, but like I said previously, what's the alternative?

Jony Ive hasn't been given "the software job". He's responsible for Design and "provides leadership and direction for Human Interface (HI) software teams across the company." Craig Federighi is responsible for software engineering.

 

[n-evo]

[...] That's an explanation, but no excuse for a careless statement. Sorry!

I forgive you. Don't worry a minute about it.

 

[joedec]

Sure.

fwiw, Apple never forced anyone to switch from the older to the newer version. Plus, by now, full AppleScript support has returned to the iWork (no 's') suite.

If you're OK with reduced functionality releases, who am I to judge? (OK iWork typo)

Jony Ive hasn't been given "the software job". He's responsible for Design and "provides leadership and direction for Human Interface (HI) software teams across the company." Craig Federighi is responsible for software engineering.

I know who Federighi is. Do you know who Scott Forstall is? I think they're still running on his momentum. He brought us truly interesting technology.

Read this if your interested in learning about Mavericks, then look at the new release, see what you think.

https://www.apple.com/media/us/osx/2013/docs/OSX_Mavericks_Core_Technology_Overview.pdf

From Apple software, Swift is interesting, Metal maybe, but those programs have been in play long before the new regime. Time will tell what the new guys come up with.

 

[Fuchal]

I have to say that the overall rendering of fonts from PB1 -> PB2 has improved drastically. Fonts look much more like Mavericks than the weird garbled mess of PB1.

 

[tkermit]

If your OK with reduced functionality releases, who am I to judge? (OK iWork typo)

I did not say that. I was responding to your specific complaint about AppleScript support. Now possibly that was only added (back) to the product in response to customer complaints, or maybe it was planned all along to reintroduce it at some point, but what's important is that they did bring it back.

Read this if your interested in learning about Mavericks, then look at the new release, see what you think.

Honestly, I'll reserve judgement (at least) until Yosemite is released and we have a final product to judge (and openly comment on).

 

[joedec]

I did not say that. I was responding to your specific complaint about AppleScript support. Now possibly that was only added (back) to the product in response to customer complaints, or maybe it was planned all along to reintroduce it at some point, but what's important is that they did bring it back.

I totally understand what your saying. However you (and Apple) have to understand if your users have a large investment in say, Applescript automation, and you're abruptly cut off, the apology and "we'll put it back" does not build a trusting relationship. My time is expensive, I don't care if the software is free.

Honestly, I'll reserve judgement (at least) until Yosemite is released and we have a final product to judge (and openly comment on).

I hope your right. Don't get me wrong, I like Apple hardware, OS X, I have an iPhone and an iPad. There's a ton of passion around Apple products, people get emotionally attached to these things, myself included.

 

[tkermit]

I totally understand what your saying. However you (and Apple) have to understand if your users have a large investment in say, Applescript automation, and you're abruptly cut off, the apology and "we'll put it back" does not build a trusting relationship.

Oh, I agree. That could and should have been handled much better. In the beginning it wasn't even clear whether AS support (and other features) would return at all.